Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."

Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

You can elaborate on your answers.

Next up: Denver Nuggets. Have a Five Question suggestion for the Mavericks? Send me a PM with ideas.

1. GROUP MAYO: Mayo, Kaman, Collison, Brand, D.Jones, M.James or GROUP MONTA: Ellis, Dalembert, Calderon, Blair, Ellington, D.Harris. Which group you got?
Probably the second group. Dalembert is way more athletic and a better no touch center than Kaman, who is basically an offensive guy and mediocre at the rest. I like Mayo more than Ellis, but Calderon is a great offensive player (smart, efficient, hot). The rest is close to a wash. I think the 2nd group fits a lot better around a jumpshooting pf.

2. TRUE or FALSE: Dirk Nowitzki will have a Tim Duncan-like resurgence this season.
True-ish. They were a solid team when he played last year (barely missed that 8th seed despite starting the year terribly) and this cast is a better fit around him. He will be very good this year.

3. The Backcourt of Monta and Jose: Surprisingly Effective? Or Surprisingly Ineffective?
Surprisingly effective (offensively). Terrible defensively. Calderon is a good, efficient shooter who knows how to play pg with other volume chuckers around him.

4. Not including Dirk, which Maverick is poised for a career resurgence?
People will be surprised at how good calderon is. I feel like he got overlooked in Tor. Maybe dalembert as well.

5. TRUE or FALSE: The Dallas Mavericks will make the playoffs this season.
True. Probably. The final two spots will be them, blazers, wolves and lakers in some combo and I have too much faith in Carlisle to put them behind two others in that group.

and two BONUS Questions:
BONUS 1: Better NBA Career: Shane Larkin or Gal Mekel?
neither? I dont think either will amount to much and cant see them taking many minutes from the other pg capable players on this roster.

BONUS 2:

Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."

Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

Nope. He flubbed it. they went all in and it didnt work. He shouldve kept chandler, no doubt about it. Perfect complementary 5 for dirk and loved playing there enough to sign for a very reasonable contract. This is all hindsight bs. Though I do think the guard play needed a change long term.

Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."

Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

You can elaborate on your answers.

Next up: Denver Nuggets. Have a Five Question suggestion for the Mavericks? Send me a PM with ideas.

1. 2nd group easily.

2. False, but he'll be back to roughly 20/8/3 on high efficiency in the regular season...and 25/8/3 in the playoffs (if we make it)

3. Surprisingly effective in the regular season. Disappointing in playoffs (if we make it)

4. Ellis

5. True

Bonus:

1. Larkin, but Mekel will be better for the Mavs over the next 2 years

2. Totally agree with Cuban. The thing most people miss is that the only goal in Dallas right now is to try to win titles. The chances of bringing all those old ass players back and winning titles was slim at best. Signing Chandler is the only move that would have made sense, but once we found out how much Chandler wanted and how much he was worth...it's a no brainer letting him walk. I will always be thankful to Chandler for playing a key role on the title team, but he could not be more over-rated. He's the 3rd best player on a title team at his absolute best. Cuban is dead on saying that the Mavs had little chance to win in 12 because everyone improved and the Mavs had no chance to improve. It's title or bust...and of course the Mavs busted...but I like our roster going forward and our flexibility a hell of a lot more than if we had paid guys like Chandler and Barea and Terry. And again...no title was going to be won 12 or 13 with the guys from 11. Dirk's injuries alone would have prevented that...not to mention the obvious decline Chandler, Barea, and Terry have seen as well.

1. GROUP MAYO: Mayo, Kaman, Collison, Brand, D.Jones, M.James or GROUP MONTA: Ellis, Dalembert, Calderon, Blair, Ellington, D.Harris. Which group you got?
--Group Monta is better at pretty much every position. I don't think Ellis is the correct answer for anything other than a losing team, but even he's better than OJ Mayo as a second option.

2. TRUE or FALSE: Dirk Nowitzki will have a Tim Duncan-like resurgence this season.
--He will play at an all-star level, not all-pro like Duncan.

3. The Backcourt of Monta and Jose: Surprisingly Effective? Or Surprisingly Ineffective?
--Any team asking Monta to be anything other than a sixth man will be ineffective and inefficient.

4. Not including Dirk, which Maverick is poised for a career resurgence?
--Brandan Wright. He's finally healthy for the first time in his NBA career and he has the opportunity to take a starting spot if he plays well enough. He's always been productive when healthy, he's just never been able to stay healthy. I also think Blair and Ellington can both make some noise, if given the playing time.

5. TRUE or FALSE: The Dallas Mavericks will make the playoffs this season.
--False. The West is simply too deep, unless Dirk plays like a superstar again. The Mavs roster is actually "good enough", and I still think they will end up 10th or 11th in the conference. That's how deep the West is.

I won't do the bonus questions. If you are going to include two bonus questions in every thread, then start making "ISH's SEVEN QUESTIONS" topics. Asshole.

Group Monta. Can't get any worse than what we've seen from Mayo and crew. And come on... Mike James was our starting point guard for a quarter of the season. Mike ****ing James.

2. TRUE or FALSE: Dirk Nowitzki will have a Tim Duncan-like resurgence this season.

Somewhat. He will surprise people... when Dirk was healthy near the end of the year, he was looking more like himself. If Dirk is healthy this year, I expect good production and numbers. 22/7/2 on 48/40/88 %.

3. The Backcourt of Monta and Jose: Surprisingly Effective? Or Surprisingly Ineffective?

I'd say effective. Monta looks like he will mesh very well with Dirk and Calderon. He should be able to have alot of space and good looks. Monta/Jose/Dirk compliment each other pretty well. Defense doesnt look good tho.

4. Not including Dirk, which Maverick is poised for a career resurgence?

Monta Ellis and/or Brendan Wright.

5. TRUE or FALSE: The Dallas Mavericks will make the playoffs this season.

Yes, assuming Dirk is healthy.

and two BONUS Questions:

BONUS 1: Better NBA Career: Shane Larkin or Gal Mekel?

Tough to say. I'd go with Mekel though.

BONUS 2:

Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."

Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

As long as he kept Tyson, I would have been ok with the decision. I honestly would rather have Tyson over Dwight.

1. Team Monta. A real distributing point guard, a more defensive-minded center, and no OJ Mayo make this team better than last year's.

2. True if he's healthy. Dirk's game is based on skill, as long as he's healthy he'll keep shooting well.

3. I think they'll perform surprisingly well in terms of stats, but their lack of defensive presence will cause problems for the team.

4. Monta Ellis.

5. True but I'm biased. Still, the West seems a bit weaker than usual next year... You've got the Thunder, the Spurs, Golden State, Memphis, the Rockets and the Clippers... but after those 6 it's wide open, you won't have 8 or 9 50 win teams like in some years. The Lakers are no longer a real threat, the TWolves still lack that extra piece to get them to the next level, the Nuggets are less formidable, the Blazers aren't a surefire playoff team, the Jazz will be in a transitional year trying to give more responsibilities to Kanter and Favors, and the Pelicans, Suns and Kings are young, rebuilding teams. Besides, as some of the teams realize they don't have a good enough roster to complete, they'll start tanking for Wiggins.

Bonus 1. Shane Larkin.

Bonus 2. It was a gamble that didn't work, but it was the right gamble. You don't contend without superstars.

2. TRUE or FALSE: Dirk Nowitzki will have a Tim Duncan-like resurgence this season.

True, I believe he will have a good season if he can stay healthy, but not to the degree of good that Timmy had.

3. The Backcourt of Monta and Jose: Surprisingly Effective? Or Surprisingly Ineffective?

Ineffective, dat defense.

4. Not including Dirk, which Maverick is poised for a career resurgence?

Not sure this counts, but Calderon? He will be good for the team I feel and will play good.

5. TRUE or FALSE: The Dallas Mavericks will make the playoffs this season.

False, but they will compete for the 8th seed.

BONUS 1: Better NBA Career: Shane Larkin or Gal Mekel?

Shane Larkin, he will be a good PG down the road. Even though he is short and has short arms, he can influence the game with his leading abilities.

BONUS 2:
Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

2. TRUE or FALSE: Dirk Nowitzki will have a Tim Duncan-like resurgence this season.

Maybe not Tim Duncan-like but he will be better this season.

3. The Backcourt of Monta and Jose: Surprisingly Effective? Or Surprisingly Ineffective?

Suprisingly effective. I don't think that bad defense will surprise anyone, but they fit very well on offense.

4. Not including Dirk, which Maverick is poised for a career resurgence?

Ellis.

5. TRUE or FALSE: The Dallas Mavericks will make the playoffs this season.

True, but it will be close (Denver, Dallas, Minnesota, Portland and maybe Lakers all could end up in the playoffs)

and two BONUS Questions:

BONUS 1: Better NBA Career: Shane Larkin or Gal Mekel?

Mekel

BONUS 2:
Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."
Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

1. GROUP MAYO: Mayo, Kaman, Collison, Brand, D.Jones, M.James or GROUP MONTA: Ellis, Dalembert, Calderon, Blair, Ellington, D.Harris. Which group you got?
A -- Monta, because I really like Dalembert paired with Dirk, and Harris is a capable backup.
2. TRUE or FALSE: Dirk Nowitzki will have a Tim Duncan-like resurgence this season.
A -- Didn't realize he needed a resurgence. That said, I think he'll be fine. Not sure "resurgence" is the right term, though.
3. The Backcourt of Monta and Jose: Surprisingly Effective? Or Surprisingly Ineffective?
A -- Effective offensively, ineffective defensively. I hope Crowder/Dalembert/Marion are ready to shoulder the defensive load of this team.

4. Not including Dirk, which Maverick is poised for a career resurgence?
A -- The term "resurgence" implies that the player in question was once very good. That doesn't apply to many Mavericks. That technicality aside... Monta or Harris or Dalembert. Monta could do very well as the slasher/creator of the team, particularly with some shooters at his disposal. Harris may again become a very good scoring guard off the bench. Dalembert finally gets to show that he can be a defensive anchor.

5. TRUE or FALSE: The Dallas Mavericks will make the playoffs this season.
A -- False, though I have them in a "dogfight" for the 8th spot.

and two BONUS Questions:
BONUS 1: Better NBA Career: Shane Larkin or Gal Mekel?
A -- I don't care about the draft or rookies. Let me watch them play first.

BONUS 2:

Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."

Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

A -- I don't even understand what he was referring to. Did he mean how he let Kidd and Chandler leave?
Anyway, I agree that it's "hard to justify keeping an older team together".

1. GROUP MAYO: Mayo, Kaman, Collison, Brand, D.Jones, M.James or GROUP MONTA: Ellis, Dalembert, Calderon, Blair, Ellington, D.Harris. Which group you got?
A -- Monta, because I really like Dalembert paired with Dirk, and Harris is a capable backup.
2. TRUE or FALSE: Dirk Nowitzki will have a Tim Duncan-like resurgence this season.
A -- Didn't realize he needed a resurgence. That said, I think he'll be fine. Not sure "resurgence" is the right term, though.
3. The Backcourt of Monta and Jose: Surprisingly Effective? Or Surprisingly Ineffective?
A -- Effective offensively, ineffective defensively. I hope Crowder/Dalembert/Marion are ready to shoulder the defensive load of this team.

4. Not including Dirk, which Maverick is poised for a career resurgence?
A -- The term "resurgence" implies that the player in question was once very good. That doesn't apply to many Mavericks. That technicality aside... Monta or Harris or Dalembert. Monta could do very well as the slasher/creator of the team, particularly with some shooters at his disposal. Harris may again become a very good scoring guard off the bench. Dalembert finally gets to show that he can be a defensive anchor.

5. TRUE or FALSE: The Dallas Mavericks will make the playoffs this season.
A -- False, though I have them in a "dogfight" for the 8th spot.

and two BONUS Questions:
BONUS 1: Better NBA Career: Shane Larkin or Gal Mekel?
A -- I don't care about the draft or rookies. Let me watch them play first.

BONUS 2:

Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."

Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

A -- I don't even understand what he was referring to. Did he mean how he let Kidd and Chandler leave?
Anyway, I agree that it's "hard to justify keeping an older team together".

Thanks for clearing that up, BH.
At the time, I thought that letting Terry leave was a bad move. In hindsight, what did Dallas miss out on? And where is Barea? Minnesota? Hurt all the time? Again, all hindsight from me... but it looks like Dallas made the correct decision with all except Chandler.

Mark Cuban: ""We basically saw the 2011-12 season as a throw away no matter who we signed," "With out the time to prepare and get their bodies ready, throwing a team with with an older starting lineup right into the fire was going to be tough. Young guys can walk into an NBA game any day of the year. Get to your mid 30s, not so much. So to bring the gang back , we would basically be losing a year. When you look at keeping together an older team and the first year after your championship is a lost year, it's hard to justify keeping an older team together."

Do you agree with Mark Cuban's rationale?

You can elaborate on your answers.

Next up: Denver Nuggets. Have a Five Question suggestion for the Mavericks? Send me a PM with ideas.

1) I've gotta go with the Ellis group, just because I have more issues with the known than the unknown. Other than my liking Brand better than Blair, player for player I probably like the entire second group better. However, the Ellis/Calderon backcourt will be attrocious defensively, and poor wing defense is not a great fit with Dirk. Dalembert could have a Tyson Chandler type revival in Dallas with opportunities he'll have to go after shots.

2) I just don't see Dirk having that level of a season, just because defensively he's not going to be great. He could have a huge shooting season though. Ellis for all his warts can run PnR with him, and Calderon's shooting will provide him some much needed spacing as opposed to last year's roster.

3) Backcourt will be surprisingly effective offensively. Monta being ball heavy pairs well with Calderon being able to do the dirty work initiating the offense, and then spread the floor with his shooting. But defensively ... they'll be terrible.

4) I'm gonna say Dalembert. Dirk has experience with hard roll players offensively like Chandler. Monta isn't a facillitator, but he will work PnR, and Calderon moves the ball around. Plus like I said before, he'll have a shot at a 3 BPG season on this team. To me it'll mostly be about staying out of foul trouble and being healthy. I'm not sure he regressed over the past few years, or it just being a matter of Milwaukee playing younger versions of similar types.

5) Man the west is deep. I'd say 7/8 comes down to them, Minnie, Portland, Utah, NO, Denver. The only team really out of it being Phx. I'd lean toward Minnie and NO, with Dallas being my third choice. But health will be a huge factor.

B1) I don't know enough about Gal Mekel to say. But I will say that I thought Larkin was a pretty good sleeper, because his size was being overhyped while his shooting was being undersold. I thought he could make up for the size issue with what wound up being superb measurable athleticism, which helped explain some of what we saw in terms of on court success. But now I don't know how that injury will effect him long term. Even if it's just a minor set back long term physically, a guy that size can't afford those types of even minor physical limitations.

B2) The theory makes sense I suppose. I just don't buy putting a 50 Million dollar roster out on the court being a lost season. If he really felt that way why even bother signing Kaman, Mayo, Brand. Why not just fill it out with cheap floatsam, rest Dirk if you really think the short prep is a health concern, try to move Marion and VC, both of whom would've been relatively short two year contract vets to chase a ring on a contender, and chased a draft pick or two for this year. It sounds like he's convincing himself after the fact more than that was the plan going in.